Liverpool FC Forum

by **stmichael** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:00 pm

I know it's been done to death but I feel it needs discussion due to the fact that we played 3 at the back for the last 15 minutes on Saturday. People will still drag up the same old argument of who's actually won anything playing this system but lets face it, it's the easiest way of getting our three brilliant central midfielders in the same team without any debate.

I love Gerrard on the right with freedom to roam, as I think it reduces his defensive responsibility and allows him to affect the game more going forward. He's also virtually impossible to mark when he plays in that position. However talk has still been rife about how he should be playing centrally with the team built around him.

The "compromise" solution to this is to go 3 at the back, and given the emergence of Agger this term (early days, I know, but he has been a force of nature), it could be a possibility.

Getting my "Militiarusher patent set of team-sheet chalks" I would propose the following as a team that would accomodate Gerrard in his free role, whilst not weakening the team by dropping Xabi or Momo...

-------------Reina-----------
--Carra-----Agger----Riise---
------Momo-----Xabi--------
Pennant---Gerrard---Kewell--
------Kuyt---Bellamy--------

Whether Riise can play as one of a back three is a matter for debate - the same could be said for Pennant and Kewell tracking back. (Perhaps this was why there was such a chase for Alves??), although if Garcia would play every match like he did against the barcodes it would be a no-brainer replacement in any case.

We tried it last season against Newcastle and it worked well I thought, especially as the players we have for the left back role are more suited to the wingback role anyway. I'm not suggesting this as a permanent solution. I just think it's something we should be looking to use more often, especially in away matches.

Just a thought, in any case.

by **metalhead** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:04 pm

I agree to a certain extent that this formation can be really used in away games because it would make the midfield hold the ball well and keep possession.

Juventus adopted this formation and it worked well, but giving the fact that we really don't have fast defenders does it make it risky?

by **murphy0151** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:07 pm

stmichael wrote:I know it's been done to death but I feel it needs discussion due to the fact that we played 3 at the back for the last 15 minutes ago on Saturday. People will still drag up the same old argument of who's actually won anything playing this system but lets face it, it's the easiest way of getting our three brilliant central midfielders in the same team without any debate.

I love Gerrard on the right with freedom to roam, as I think it reduces his defensive responsibility and allows him to affect the game more going forward. He's also virtually impossible to mark when he plays in that position. However talk has still been rife about how he should be playing centrally with the team built around him.

The "compromise" solution to this is to go 3 at the back, and given the emergence of Agger this term (early days, I know, but he has been a force of nature), it could be a possibility.

Getting my "Militiarusher patent set of team-sheet chalks" I would propose the following as a team that would accomodate Gerrard in his free role, whilst not weakening the team by dropping Xabi or Momo...

-------------Reina-----------
--Carra-----Agger----Riise---
------Momo-----Xabi--------
Pennant---Gerrard---Kewell--
------Kuyt---Bellamy--------

Whether Riise can play as one of a back three is a matter for debate - the same could be said for Pennant and Kewell tracking back. (Perhaps this was why there was such a chase for Alves??), although if Garcia would play every match like he did against the barcodes it would be a no-brainer replacement in any case.

We tried it last season against Newcastle and it worked well I thought, especially as the players we have for the left back role are more suited to the wingback role anyway. I'm not suggesting this as a permanent solution. I just think it's something we should be looking to use more often, especially in away matches.

Just a thought, in any case.

Thats my Pro Evo formation you copy cat.

Nah, I think we will see this more times than we see it more often this season. I think with Hyypia's age he needs to other centre halfa at the back with him. With Hyypia being in the center off the two. And if we were to play this formation theres only one place were Riise could play and thats the left wing back role you couldnt play Riise on the left side off the three as his defensive qualitys are limited.

by **Ace Ventura** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:11 pm

I really think that if we have a massive game against a top side 3-5-2 would be the best way to go.

It gives the protection to the back four and also allows our best player the freedom to do as he wants while we still have a player out wide.

The reason i was suggesting this formation a few weeks ago was because Kewell was injured and i wasn't sure about Gonzalez, but to be fair i though Speedy performed well on Saturday, he will get goals without doubt. So even in a basic 4-4-2 now our side looks like it has far more pace and balance.

by **CardinalRed** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:19 pm

The formation itself has been tried and tested by various managers around the world and is well liked, the personnel to play in it is the eternal question.... As good as Riise is, he could not play in a back 3 as he is better going forward and would be restricted by playing as deep as he would have to.... He could play in the left wing back role with no problem.... Carra, Sami and Agger would be my choice for the back 3. In this type of formation the back 3, along with the "free role" man (Gerrard?) are probably the most important spaces to fill for any coach.....

:cool:

by **RUSHIE#9** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:57 pm

I can see a 3-5-2 becoming a real possibilty for us over this coming season with the player swe've brought. I just wonder whether Rafa may be trying the Barcelona idea of having a core side but in one or two positions changing players depending on whethe they are playing home or away. i.e. Barcelona swap between Van Bronckhorst at home and Sylvinho away. With our squad we can quite easily adapt from a 4-4-2 at anfield to a possible 3-5-2 away from home using the same idea. At anfield we may see SPEEDY on the left wing of a 4-4-2 with Aurelio or RIISE in a LWB role in a 3-5-2 away from anfield. The midfield as pointed out would benefit from allowing Gerrard to come more central but still having his freedom to roam like he has been without leaving one midfielder or the defence exposed. In the last two home games Finnan has also been showing a willingness(is that a word??) to get forward like a RWB and I don't see a problem with him adopting this role in a 3-5-2.

by **Redman in wales** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:31 pm

stmichael wrote:-------------Reina-----------
--Carra-----Agger----Riise---
------Momo-----Xabi--------
Pennant---Gerrard---Kewell--
------Kuyt---Bellamy--------

I like ... its a big thumbs up from me!

(more detailed response later)

by **Sarge** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:56 pm

I believe the only downside to that formation for the time being is kewell. I'd say gonzo is the better player for that position

by **aCe'** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:11 pm

4-4-2 works for us.... i wouldnt wanna try sumthin new at this point if i were rafa !
Gerrard is a great player....and being in the right wing definitely limits his abilites .... but, that doesnt mean that we need to change our formation, thereby risking our no.1 stength (our defense) in order to allow gerrard more roaming space.
Dont get me wrong, i'd love to see gerrard in central midfield ! in tottenhams game....it was as if he wasnt playing in that first half..... kinda felt bad for him... ! but still... if we want to play him as a central midfielder so bad.... i'd rather we stick to our 4 defenders.... play gerrard, sissoko and alonso in central midfield... and start garcia and a winger instead of bellamy.....4-5-1

Reina

Finnan Carragher Agger Riise

X.Alonso
Sissoko
Gerrard
Garcia Gonzales

Kuyt

We'v tried 4-5-1 before....and it works for us.... Garcia is a great player and would be perfect if we were to play a formation with only one striker.... him and gerrard can switch positions like they do when played together.... would give us plenty of options going forward and all !
On paper, 3-5-2 seems like a good formation.... but i doubt it working for us....wouldnt mind us giving it a try though.... cant see it happening

by **craig da Toxteth iron** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:51 pm

We played 3-5-2 against the barcodes last season. Rafa formation was Sucessful, by playing Gerrard behind Crouch & Cisse.Making Gerrard to do whatever he wants to do on the pitch

by **Bad Bob** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:16 pm

It could work a treat but it might take some tinkering with the wingbacks to get the balance right. This line-up gives us a strong defensive platform with wingbacks who are tidy on the ball and can provide width going forward, but who might not get beyond the opposition fullbacks much:

Reina

Carragher Hyypia Agger

Finnan Alonso Sissoko Aurelio/Riise
Gerrard

Bellamy Kuyt

Alternatively, we could go with a more attack-minded pair in the wingback roles. Pennant's been better than many expected at tracking back, as has Gonzales and Kewell--if he ever returns--has the wherewithal to get back as well, so we wouldn't be sacrificing too much defensively (especially with Alonso and Momo providing cover):

Reina

Carragher Hyypia Agger

Pennant Alonso Sissoko Kewell/Gonzales
Gerrard

Bellamy Kuyt

Then again, we can have one out-and-out winger on one side and one proper wingback on the other to provide some balance between attack and defense. Oh, the permutations are many and varied...aren't you just waiting for the gaffer to give it a go and see how it comes off?

by **vlady16.1** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:54 pm

i really like the 3-5-2 as we can get more of our good players on the field. also it is different and will force the opposition to respond to it which empowers us

i really like the freedom it can give gerrard :pirate

by **wee_boi888** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:23 pm

Think bad bob has nailed it for a 3-5-2

Don't really think Rafa is adventurous enough to have kewell/gonzo and pennant to start off from the beginning, and I think a general consensus was that Alves and Aurelio were to come in so we could experiment with the wingback 3-5-2...well shyte happens with Alves huh.

by **JC_81** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:42 pm

I just don't fancy 3-5-2 as a permanent fixture personally and I have a theory as to why only teams on the continent have been successful with this formation in the past.

Abroad and in other European leagues, teams are happy to sit back and concede possession, and the successful teams like Milan and Juve who have played this formation usually have a playmaker such as a Zidane or a Kaka who the whole system revolves around. In my opinion we have a player in Gerrard who is up there with those players ability-wise, but he doesn't have the guile or ability to unlock defences like those players by playing off the front 2. I still think Gerrard is far more effective coming from wide on the right or from a deeper central midfield position.

In England, if a top team sets out 3-5-2, it is an easy system for a lesser team to stifle. If you match it man for man and line up 3-5-2 against it, the effectiveness of the wingbacks is decreased and with the faster paced and more aggressive English style of play, the central midfield area becomes frantic and overcrowded. It happened to us a lot in the Roy Evans era - teams came to Anfield and mirrored our formation and we struggled to break them down.

I agree that 3-5-2 enables us to get our best individuals onto the pitch - ie our 3 centre halves and our 3 central midfielders, but the best individual players don't always make the best team and I still think we'll get more joy in the long term with 4-4-2, while 3-5-2 is a good ace to have up the sleeve if we need it for the occasional game or even to change a game we have gone 4-4-2 from the start in.

by **JBG** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:51 pm

I don't fancy 3-5-2 at all. Roy Evans tried it and no English team that I can remember who used it prospered in Europe.

A back four with adventurous full backs is still the way forward, with Momo and Alonso in the middle, one wide player with Gerrard given the licence to roam in from the right is probably our best formation, with various combinations of our forward players to suit the occasion.

Liverpool FC Forum

3-5-2

Who is online